CIT v. United Commercial and Industrial Co (P.) Ltd.

M/S. Rohit Bal vs. ACIT

In the result appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2005-06

…ence of any confirmation or any evidence on record, it is difficult to believe the explanation of the assessee. Hon'ble. Calcutta High Court in the cases of Bharati Private Ltd. vs. CIT 111 ITR 951 and CIT vs. United Commercial and Industrial Co. Pvt. Ltd. 187 ITR 596 have held that mere filing of confirmation not enough to prove credit. However in the present case the assessee has not even filed the confirmation from the creditors. Therefore credit remained unexplained. Ld. Counsel for assessee relied upon certain case laws on the proposition that when amount is shown as revenue receipt and taxes have been…

Om Logistics Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillaiom Logistics Ltd. Acit 130, Transport Nagar, Circle-21 Ring Road, Punjabi Bagh Vs. New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aaaco4716C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…Ld. CIT(DR), placed reliance upon following decisions: 11 • CIT vs. Durga Prasad More reported in (1971) 82 ITR 540 (SC) • CITvs. Precession Finance Pvt/Ltd., reported in 208 ITR 465 (Cal) • CIT vs. United Commercial and Industries Co. Pvt. Ltd., reported in 187 ITR 596 (Cal) • CIT vs. Nova Promoters and Finlease Pvt.Ltd., reported in 342 ITR 169 (Delhi) • Mukesh Shaw vs. ITO reported in 204 taxman 615 (Jharkhand) • CIT vs. N R Portfolio Pvt. Ltd., reported in 29 taxmaan.com 291 (Delhi) • CIT vs. Focus Exports Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2 to 8 Taxmann 88 (Delhi) • Decision of Delhi ITAT in the case of Matchless Glas…

Mr Vidit Jain, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Sainiassessment Year : 2010-11

…of the transactions in the matter. Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Bharati Private Limited. v. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal I, Calcutta. 111 ITR 951 and Commissioner Of Income Tax. v. United Commercial And Industrial Co. Pvt. Limited. 187 ITR 596 held that mere filing of Page 5 of 10 Mr. Vidit Jain vs. ITO confirmation is not enough. Even in the gifts declaration no source of given gift to the assessee has been mentioned. Thus the comments of assessee to prove creditworthiness of the donors and genuineness of the transaction have not been proved. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of…

Sanjay Singh, Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini

…ha Banarjee Vs CIT (1963) 49 ITR 112 (SC) " CIT Vs Shree Gopal & Co. (1993) 204 ITR 285 (Gau) " Precision Finance (P) Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 465 (Cal.) " CIT Vs Baishnab Charan Mohanty (1995) 212 ITR 199 (Ori) " United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. (1994) 187 ITR 596 (Cal.) " Oriental Wire Ind. Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 134 ITR 688 (Cal.) " C. Kant & Co. (1980) 126 ITR 63 (Cal.) 7 Sanjay Singh " M.A. Limiter Kutty (1992) 198 ITR 147 (Ker.) " RBN Naidu Vs CIT (1956) 29 ITR 194 (Nag.) " Chunnilal Tikamchand Coal Co. Ltd. Vs CIT (1955) 30 ITR 181 (SC) " Lalchand Bhagat Ambica Ram Vs CIT (1959) 37 ITR 288 (SC) " Sri Ram…

Trident Towers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 537/DEL/2013 A.Y. : 2002-03 M/S TRIDENT TOWERS PVT. LTD., INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 16(4), 1/8, WEST PATEL NAGAR, VS. NEW DELHI NEW DELHI – 110 008 (PAN: AAACT0951C) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. V.K. Tulsian, CA Department by : Sh. Umesh Chand Dubey, Sr. DR ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER H.S. SIDHU PER PER H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU : : : : JM H.S. SIDHU Assessee has filed thi…

ITO, Meerut vs. M/S. Jayanti Prasad Jeevan Lal Jain, Meerut

In the result we confirm the finding of the ld

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiito, Jayanti Prasad Jeevan Lal Jain, Ward-1(3), Sarraf Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Meerut Navjeevan, New Prem Puri, Railways Road, Meerut Pan: Aabcj6694D (Appellant) (Respondent)

…tunities having been allowed. Reliance is placed on the ratio laid down in following cases:- (i) CIT Vs. La Medica (2001) 250 ITR -575 (Delhi) (ii) Sri Ganesh Rice Mills Vs. CIT (2007) 294 ITR 316 (Alld.) (Hi) CIT Vs. United Commercial and Industrial Co.(199) 187 ITR 596 Cal. (iv) CIT Vs Precision Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Cal) 208 ITR 465 (v) CIT v/s Korlay Trading Co. Ltd. (Cal.) 232 ITR 820. (vi) Krishan Kumar Jhanb v/s ITO and Anr (Punjab & Haryana) 17 DTR 249 (vii) M/s Sejai International Ltd v/s CIT Meerut (All.) Appeal No.306 of 2010. (viii) CIT Vs Durga Prasad More, 82 ITR 540 (SC) (ix) CIT Vs P. Mohnakala, 291…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Lifestyle Texworks Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed partly for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Lifestyle Texworks Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Circle-4(1), Room No. 407, 4Th Apartment 530, Tower Iii, Mount Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Kailash, East Of Kailash, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaacl7069F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 16.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 21/02/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Vii, New Delhi Raising Following Grounds; “01. The Order Of The Learned Cit (Appeals) Is Erroneous & Contrary To Facts & Law. 02. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Cit (Appeals) Has Erred In Deleting The Penalty Of Rs.52,29,408/- Made U/S 68 Of The Act, Being The Unconfirmed Unsecured Loan. 2.1 The Ld. Cit (A) Has Ignored The Findings Recorded By The Ao & The Fact That The Assessee Did Not Discharge The Onus Of Proving The Creditworthiness Of The Creditors & Genuineness Of The Transactions. 03. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit (Appeals) Has Erred I N Deleting The Addition Of Rs.12,62,503/- Made On Account Of Disallowance Excessive Expenditure. 3.1. The Ld. Cit (A) Ignored The Finding Recorded By The Ao & The Fact That The Assessee Did Not File Required Evidences To Substantiate Its Claim.

…11 (Gau.) & CIT vs. Korlay Trading Company Ltd. (1999) 232 ITR 820 If all the aforesaid three conditions are proved the burden shifts on the Revenue to prove that the amount belonged to the assessee. [CIT vs. United Commercial & Industrial Co. (P) Ltd. (1991) 187 ITR 596 (Cal.); M.A. Unneeri Kutty vs. CIT (1992)198 ITR 147 (Ker.); CIT Vs. Precision Finance P. Ltd. (1994) 208 ITR 495(Cal.). It has also been held by the various High Courts that the assessee cannot be asked to prove the source of source or the origin of origin. Reference may be made to the decisions in S. Hastimal vs. CIT (1963) 49 ITR 273(Mad); Tol…

M/S. Ram Pal & Party (AOP), New Delhi vs. ITO (OSD), New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ram Pal & Party (Aop), Vs. Ito (Osd), E-78, 1St Floor, Lic Colony, Delhi-Ix, Paschim Vihar, Cr Building, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaar3396R Assessment Year : 2004-05

…Kale Khan Mohammad Khanif Vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC), wherein it has been held that the onus of proving the source of sum of money found to have been received by the appellant is on him. The AO placed reliance in the case of CIT Vs. United Commercial Bank Ltd., 187 ITR 596 (Ca I), wherein it has been held that mere filing of confirmatory letters does not discharge the onus that lies on the assessee. The AO has also quoted the case of Oceanic Products Exporting Company Vs. CIT (2000) 241 ITR 497, as per which the burden is placed on the assessee to prove credits in its books of accounts and that such a burden has…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ram Pal & Party (AOP), New Delhi

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ram Pal & Party (Aop), Vs. Ito (Osd), E-78, 1St Floor, Lic Colony, Delhi-Ix, Paschim Vihar, Cr Building, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaar3396R Assessment Year : 2004-05

…Kale Khan Mohammad Khanif Vs. CIT, 50 ITR 1 (SC), wherein it has been held that the onus of proving the source of sum of money found to have been received by the appellant is on him. The AO placed reliance in the case of CIT Vs. United Commercial Bank Ltd., 187 ITR 596 (Ca I), wherein it has been held that mere filing of confirmatory letters does not discharge the onus that lies on the assessee. The AO has also quoted the case of Oceanic Products Exporting Company Vs. CIT (2000) 241 ITR 497, as per which the burden is placed on the assessee to prove credits in its books of accounts and that such a burden has…

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-II vs. Kishori Lal Construction Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

…sion Finance Ltd., 208 ITR 465 (CAL). His further submission was that the onus on the assessee does not get discharged merely by filing of confirmatory copy of account as held by the Calcutta High court in the case of CIT vs. United Commercial reported in 187 ITR 596 (CAL). His further endeavour was to demonstrate that the decision of the tribunal is contradictory in view of the fact that on one hand the ITAT has held that the AO has not granted opportunity to the assessee for cross examining the owners of Yadav and Compnay and on the other hand the ITAT has recorded that the signatures of Sh. O.P. Yadav…

Commissioner of Income T Ax Delhi II vs. Kishori Lal Construction Ltd

Appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

…sion Finance Ltd., 208 ITR 465 (CAL). His further submission was that the onus on the assessee does not get discharged merely by filing of confirmatory copy of account as held by the Calcutta High court in the case of CIT vs. United Commercial reported in 187 ITR 596 (CAL). His further endeavour was to demonstrate that the decision of the tribunal is contradictory in view of the fact that on one hand the ITAT has held that the AO has not granted opportunity to the assessee for cross examining the owners of Yadav and Compnay and on the other hand the ITAT has recorded that the signatures of Sh. O.P. Yadav…